Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma: The American Portraits Series 0809077388, 9780809077380

Table of contents :
Poca
Contents
Preface
1. Amonute's People
2. What the English Knew
3. First Contact
4. Jamestown
5. Kidnapped
6. Imprisonment
7. Pocahontas and John
8. In London Town
9. 1622, and Queen Cockacoeske
Notes
Bibliographical Essay
Acknowledgments
Index

Citation preview

ocaliom tas AND

^wLatam

THE

D ilem m a

Poca AND

ueen Çockacoeske

177

tive than any complaints about longstanding injustice: out of virtu­ ous* wifely affection, she reminded the English repeatedly that it was in just such circumstances that her dear husband had been killed, along with one hundred other men. She was not going to make the same mistake now. At lengtlyshe agreed ta provide twelve men, no more, though the English believed $hç hadj&o at her.coramand.j36 In their rage at Indians in general, Nathaniel Bacon's followers chose to attack those nearest at hand rather than pursue those actu­ ally responsible for the continuing raids. Though Çockacoeske had just signed an agreement and had provided the twelve men to serve as guides to the English military, her village was sacked and some women killed; she herself was forced to flee to the woods. Afterward the colonial government was unsympathetic; they focused their ef­ forts on the rebellious Nathaniel Bacon and his followers and ig­ nored their allies. Fortunately, in 1677 commissioners of the king arrived from England to investigate the situation in the colony and make recommendations. They advocated a meaningful peace agree­ ment with the Virginia Indians. On May 29,1677, at least four tribes gathered to sign the Treaty of Middle Plantation, Itw ould govern colonial 1 s, until the American Revolution. Endorsing the treaty were the queen of the Weyanok, the king of the Nottowa y a nd the king of the Nansemond, as well as Çocka­ coeske, the queen of the Pamunkey, and her son, John West. The Appomattock were there, and in favor o f the accord but forbidden to sign because some of their members were on trial for murder. Several other tribes were said to be subsumed under Cockacoeske’s chief­ tainship, as in the Powhatan days of old, among them the Mattaponi, the Chickahominy, and the Rappahannock. The latter two groups, however, had traditionally been both populous and powerful, and their young men were quick to reject Çockacoeske s rulership after the treaty was signed, though they accepted the document itself. Two of the land reservations established in that moment still exist today,

i7*

POCAHONTAS

albeit in much reduced form. The groups represented then form, to­ gether with the Monacans, the core of the state-recognized tribes of Virginia at the start of the twenty-first century—the Chickahominy, Mattaponi, Nansemond, Pamunkey, and Rappahannock. They strug­ gle today to keep their traditions alive.37 It is fashionable in some circles to lament Pocahontas’s death, not for herself or her family or her people, but for the sake of history: it is said that had she lived, advocating for her people in the(tumultuous^lecades that followed and encouraging more intermarriage, events might have turned out differendy. Indian-white relations might have been more harmonious. It is naïve to think so. The destruction of Virginia’s Indian tribes was not a question of miscommunication and missed opportunities. W hite setders wanted the Indians’ land and had the strength to take it, the Indians could not hve w thqut dieu land. I t Ts unfair to imply that somehow Poca­ hontas, or Queen Cockacoeske, or others like them could have done more, could have played their cards differendy, and so have saved their people. The gambling game they were forced to play was a dan­ gerous one, and they had one hand, even two, tied behind their backs at all times. It is important to do them the honor of believing that they did their best. They all made decisions as well as they could, managing in what were often nearly unbearable situations. There is nothing they could have done that would have dramatically changed the outcome: a new nation was going to be built on their people’s de­ struction—a destruction that would be either partial or complete. They did not fail. On the contrary, theirs is a story of heroism as it exists in the real world, not in epic tales. Their dwindling people did survive, against all odds. There is a loop in the Pamunkey River that has surrounded Indian land time out of mind. It is called the Pa­ munkey Reservation now, and the people there say it shelters Pow­ hatan’s bones. In the summer, wildflowers grow at the edge of the water, and Pocahontas^. people can still catch a faint smell of the sea, just as they cpultiin 1606. J

JAÇotes

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED IN CITATIONS

CWCJS Philip Barbour, ed., The Complete Works of Captain John Smith, 3 vols. (Williamsburg, Va.: Institute for Early American Culture, 1986). VMHB Virginia Magazine ofHistory and Biography WMQ_ William and Mary Quarterly ONE

Amonute's People

i. Most of what we know about the lives of the Virginia Algonkians comes from the written works of English people who lived among them, however briefly, such as John Smith and Henry Spelman, or who interviewed Indians and questioned them about their lives, such as William Strachey (in Jamestown) and Samuel Purchas (in London). Through these sources we learn about such things as their dugout canoes, their use of rivers and creeks for rapid communication, and die structure of village life. The best scholarly synthesis and analysis of what we know of the Powhatan Indians from such sources is to be found in the work of anthropologist Helen Rountree, espe­ cially The Powhatan Indians of Virginia: Their Traditional Culture (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1989). For an overview of the ways in which our knowledge is en­ riched by archaeological studies, see Rountree’s work with E. Randolph Turner III, Before and After Jamestown: Virginias Powhatans and Their Predecessors (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2002). Karen Ordahl Kupperman, Indians and English: Facing Off in Early America (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2000), offers an excellent treatment of very early contacts before official colonization began, and of the knowledge that the Indians had gathered before Europeans planted their flags. At

i 8o

Ch(otes to pages 4-5

Plymouth, for example, the Pilgrims were met by an Indian who said “Welcome,”hav­ ing learned proper English greetings from fishermen in Canada (34-35). 2. Archaeologists have recently uncovered the remains of Werowocomoco at to­ day's Purtan Bay (a traditional name conceivably based on “Powetan Bay") on the York River. The nature of the artifacts, the position given the village by three seventeenthcentury mapmakers, John Smith’s description of the site, and the distance he reported it to be from Jamestown together prove beyond doubt that investigators have indeed found Powhatan’s seat. The Werowocomoco Research Group includes Deanna Beacham (Virginia Council on Indians), Martin Gallivan (Department of Anthro­ pology of the College of William and Mary), Danielle Moretti-Langholtz (American Indian Resource Center of the College of William and Mary), E. Randolph Turner E l (Virginia Department of Historical Resources), and archaeologists David A. Brown and Thane Harpole. Property owners Bob and Lynn Ripley have been gener­ ous and cooperative, envisioning themselves as stewards of the land. The Research Group’s 2003 press release is available from the College of William and Mary. For a discussion of the importance of the collaboration occurring among the property own­ ers, the archaeologists, and the Virginia Indian community, see Michelle Tirado, “Ar­ tifacts: Werowocomoco Discovered,”American Indian Report 19:7 (July 2003): 24-26. For a sense of what the village probably looked like, scholars turn to a 1580s painting of the Indian “Town of Secotan” by Roanoke colonist John White. In 1590, Theodor de Bry made an engraving based on this painting (see frontispiece) and published it with Thomas Harriot’s text, A Briefe and True Report of the New Found Land of Vir­ ginia. De Bry aligned the houses in a slightly more orderly fashion than did White, in keeping with European expectations, but his work still captures much of what was real in the villages of the relatively unified cultural region of today’s Virginia and North Carolina. 3. Exactly where residents of Werowocomoco stored most of their canoes has not been proven. It would have been in one of the two creeks wrapping around the village, however, and the one on the left is far smaller and muddier than the one on the right. Furthermore, at the opening to the cove on the right there is some evidence of a land­ ing. Interested readers should remain on the lookout for reports to be published by the Werowocomoco Research Group (see note 2). The site may have had important polit­ ical associations even before the time of Powhatan. For a consideration of the ways in which political hierarchies rose and fell, see Jeffrey L. Hantman and Debra L. Gold, “The Woodland in the Middle Adantic: Ranking and Dynamic Political Stability,” in The Woodland Southeasty ed. David G. Anderson and Robert C. Mainfort, Jr. (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2002). For a brief and accessible discussion of more typical Indian villages’ usual location and relationship to the land, see Helen Rountree, “Beyond the Village: A Colonial Parkway Guide to the Local Indians’ Use of Natural Resources,” available from the Jamestown-Yorktown Foundation. 4. Pocahontas may not have been exacdy nine when the English arrived in 1607, butJohn Smith, who spoke with her often, believed her to be ten years old in 1608, and Strachey and the other colonists believed her to be eleven or twelve in 1609. They said she was prepubescent at that time. She married in about 1610, when she would have been expected to be twelve or thirteen. Only later was Pocahontas’s age raised in Eu­ ropean accounts so as to render her a young woman at the time of these events. For further discussion of the issue of her age, see chapter 8.

JJfotes to pages 6-10

181

5. The Powhatans referred to the whites as coat-wearers on several occasions. Daniel Richter in Facing Eastfrom Indian Country: A N ative History o f Early America (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001), 13-15, discusses all the names Algonkians had for them, including “woodworkers,” “cloth-makers,” “metal-workers,” and “axe-makers.”

6. David Quinn, England and the Discovery o f America, 1481-1620 (New York: Al­ fred A. Knopf, 1974), 419-29. 7. Paul Hoffman, A New Andalucia and a Way to the Orient: The American Southeast During the Sixteenth Century (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1990), Chapters 8 and 10. Hofiman uses Spanish archival documents. Extant documents on the Jesuit venture are collected in Clifford M. Lewis and Albert J. Loomie, eds., The Spanish Jesuit Mission in Virginia, 7570-/572 (Chapel Hill: University of North Car­ olina Press, 1953). Additional research has been done by Charlotte Gradie. See her “Spanish Jesuits in Virginia: The Mission that Failed,” VMHB 96 (1988): 131-56, and “The Powhatans in the Context of the Spanish Empire,” in Helen Rountree, ed., Powhatan Foreign Relations, 7500-7722 (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1993). Gradie was the first to point out that Don Luis may well have been lying when he said he could not find his homeland with soldiers aboard. He may have been picked up south of his family’s territories, but only one Spaniard, who was wrong about other issues, mentioned that. Nor do we know for certain which tribe Luis came from. The Spanish recorded that he was from “Ajacân”: either it was a small village that never became known to the English, or they misunderstood the name. Spanish records make it clear that the Jesuits landed in what would have been Paspahegh territory, and that Don Luis considered himself related to the people there, though they were not his immediate family. When they crossed the neck of land to setde on the next river up, the York, they would have been in Chiskiak territory, and that was where Don Luis’s brother lived, so he was probably Chiskiak himself. Further evidence for this interpretation is the fact that the Chickahominy considered Don Luis to have been, symbolically or politically speaking, Powhatan’s father, and the Chiskiak were often added to the list of tribes that formed Powhatan’s initial power base. Scholarly debate on Luis’s exact relationship to Powhatan—which we will in fact never know—has been ably summarized by Helen Rountree in Pocahontas's People: The Powhatan Indi­ ans o f Virginia Through Four Centuries (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1990), 15-20. Readers should be aware that there is no basis at all for the story, which has been accepted by some scholars, that Don Luis was in fact Opechankeno, who appears later in these pages. I have benefited in my detective work on these issues from the in­ sights of archaeologist Randolph Turner, made in personal communications, July 2003. Continuing research is being conducted by Daniel K. Richter, director of the McNeil Center for Early American Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. 8. Fathers Luis de Quirös and Juan Baptista de Segura to Juan de Hinistrosa, Sep­ tember 12,1570, in Lewis and Loomie, Spanish Jesuit Mission, 91-92. 9. Ralph Hamor, A True Discourse o f the Present State o f Virginia (1615; Richmond: Virginia State Library, 1957), 13. They said they hated the Spanish for having brought Powhatan’s father—indicating any elder kinsman—to their shores. They lived next door to the Paspaheghs, and the Spanish could easily have thought they were landing in the same territory as the first expedition had. It is logical that they themselves did not foresee being mistaken for the Paspaheghs, with whom they had tense relations.

i

Chfotes to pages 11-15

82

10. For the full story, see Alden Vaughan, “Sir Walter Ralegh’s Indian Inter­ preters,” W M Q 59 (2002): 341-76. For the word boy in Pocahontas’s language, see John Smith, A M ap o f Virginia w ith a Description o f the Country (London: Joseph Barnes, 1612), in CWCJS 1:136. There were of course other ways of saying boy in other related languages. See Frank T. Siebert, “Resurrecting Virginia Algonquian from the Dead: The Reconstituted and Historical Phonology of Powhatan,” in Studies in Southeastern Indian Languages, ed. James M. Crawford (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1975)* The literature on “the lost colony” in general is substantial. A classic work is Quinn, England and the Discovery o f America. Newer work includes Giles Milton, Big C hief Elizabeth: The Adventures and Fate o f the First English Colonists in America (New York: Farrar, Straus Sc Giroux, 2000), and Lee Miller, Roanoke: Solving the M ystery o f the Lost Colony (New York: Arcade Publishing, 2000). 11. The debate on what became of the Roanoke colonists is extensive. Rountree has summarized it in light of Powhatan’s political context in Pocahontas's People, 21-27, and Miller in Roanoke provides strong evidence that they were sold as slaves. 12. An excellent summary of Powhatan’s rise to power is Rountree, Pocahontas's People, chap. 1. Frederick Gleach also treats it in Powhatan's World and Colonial Vir­ ginia: A Conflict o f Cultures (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1 9 9 7 ), as does Margaret Holmes Williamson, Powhatan Lords o f Life and Death: Command an d Con­ sent in Seventeenth-Century Virginia (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2003). Importantly, archaeologist Randolph Turner assesses evidence left not by British writ­ ers but by the indigenous themselves in their trade goods and settlements, in “Native American Protohistoric Interactions in the Powhatan Core Area,” in Rountree, Pow­ hatan Foreign Relations. A sophisticated treatment of traditionally coexisting forms of political power and influence with Powhatan society, which did not always privilege the chieftainships, is Martin D. Gallivan, James R iver Chiefdoms: The Rise o f Social Inequality in the Chesapeake (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2003). 13. Daniel Richter discusses the extent to which such changes constandy took place in the Native American world, even before the arrival of the Europeans, in Fac­ ing E ast from Indian Country , 36-39. In the case of the Powhatans, we should remem­ ber that they were dealing not only with Iroquoian enemies but also with threats from the Piedmont Siouans (the Monocans), Maryland’s Algonkian paramount chieftain­ ship (the Piscataway), and, internally, the populous Chickahominy. See Rountree, Powhatan Foreign Relations.

14. William Strachey, The Historie ofT ravell into Virginia Britania , ed. Louis B. Wright and Virginia Freund (1612; London: Hakluyt Society, 1953), 68. 15. Sources generally agree on what her names were, though their meanings are de­ batable, or lost. Pocahontas’s private name may have been Matoaka. (See the discussion in chapter 7.) We have no hard evidence that the Powhatans really gave their children private names, only an ambiguous comment by Samuel Purchas, but the practice was widespread among Native Americans in general. Henry Spelman describes an infant’s naming ceremony in his “Relation of Virginia” in Travels and Works o f Captain John Smithy ed. Edward Arber and A. G. Bradley (Edinburgh: John Grant, 1910), cix. 16. Ibid., ad. 17. It is important to note that the word princess is therefore inapplicable to Poca­ hontas or any other Algonkian woman.

Quotes to pages 16-22

183

18. Strachey, Historie o f Travell, 63-69. Numerous scholars mention that Powhatan made political use of intermarriage and, separately, that he often set his own sons to rule over subject tribes. They have not tended to point out the way in which he was us­ ing matrilineality and polygyny at the same time, but the pattern is immediately obvious to scholars familiar with Native American state-building practices in Mesoamerica and the Andes. 19. Spelman, “Relation of Virginia,”cviii. 20. See Pedro Carrasco, “Royal Marriages in Ancient Mexico,” in Explorations in Ethnohistory: Indians o f Central Mexico in the Sixteenth Century , ed. H. R. Harvey and H. Premm (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1984). 21. Strachey, Historie ofTravell, 61-62. Hamor also talks about this favored daugh­ ter in True Discourse, 40-43. 22. For a remarkable treatment of women's work, see Helen Rountree, “Powhatan Indian Women: The People Captain John Smith Barely Saw,”Ethnohistory 45 (1998): 1-29. She has gone beyond the texts left by English men, actually performing some of the work herself and studying the available plants in the region. 23. Rountree, “Powhatan Indian Women,”3. 24. Strachey, Histone ofTravell, 65. Rountree, in “Powhatan Indian Women,” 1819, has proven that collecting the special blue feathers needed for one cloak would have taken several years. 25. Strachey, in Historie ofTravell, 101, told the story secondhand, having gotten it from Captain Argali, who visited the Potomacs while Henry Spelman, the young in­ terpreter, resided there. 26. A number of scholars do accept the notion of the dichotomy between a benev­ olent and a terrible deity. However, Mexicanists for years likewise accepted the Spaniards’ belief that the Aztecs had worshipped a benevolent Quetzalcoad and a bloodthirsty Huitzilopochtli; only recently has greater attention to sources written in their own language disproved the notion. One of Powhatan’s priests, interviewed by Samuel Purchas, categorically denied the dichotomy. See Purchas, H is Pilgrimage, 3rd ed. (London: William Stansby, 1617), 955. Frederick Gleach notes the embedded mor­ pheme manito in mamanitowik in Powhatan's World, 33. The concept of the ohee has proven particularly difficult for scholars, but the idea of a physical manifestation of a local god who is at the same time part of the larger divinity of the universe, and who is both a benefactor and a terror to his people, is quite common in other Native Amer­ ican cultures. Students might compare the notion of the Andean huaca, for example. Smith and Strachey captured the concept; only in later sources did it become con­ fused. See Williamson, Powhatan Lords o f Life and Death , 176-80. Some Virginia In­ dians today practice their own version of their ancestors’ religion. 27. Strachey, Historie ofT ravell , 102. This god was the great Hare, a significant presence in Algonkian religion in general. See Williamson, Powhatan Lords o f Life and Death , 174-75. On priests tending to the temples, and on ordinary people not under­ standing their formulaic prayers, see the interview with the priest Uttamatomakin in Purchas, H is Pilgrimagey3rd ed., 954-55. 28. Strachey, in Historie ofTravell\ 40, records the three-hundred-year tradition. Rountree, in Pocahontas's People, dismisses it, given the archaeological evidence of con-

184

JA(otes

to pages 22-28

tinuous cultural development; but in Powhatan Indians o f Virginia (49-50) she gathers together every mention o f pictoglyphic counting or mapping records. D an Richter, in Facing E astfrom Indian Country, 3-5, summarizes the agricultural revolution on the East Coast.

29. This is the purport o f the Pulitzer Prize-winning book by Jared Diamond, 1997). There

Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates o f Human Societies (New York: Norton,

is, o f course, more to the argument, and the text deserves a close reading by all serious historians. Traditionally people exaggerated the technological power of the English in the seventeenth century, and in response scholars have recendy tended to dismiss it to an unrealistic extent, in some cases even asserting that the Europeans did not really have a technological advantage since they were dependent on the Indians for food for the first few years. In an era o f increasing political sensibilities, it has seemed impolitic on the part o f professors to say anything that m ight be construed by some as tanta­ m ount to a statement that Europeans were “more advanced” or in any way “superior.” Diamond allows us to proceed without self-consciousness, as the technological differ­ ential resulting from die presence or absence o f suitable plant species thousands o f years ago obviously has nothing to do with intelligence.

30. It is even conceivable that D on Luis was still alive, but it is highly unlikely, as Powhatan himself was already an old man and Luis would have been older still. Powhatan also would have evinced even greater understanding o f the Europeans if a man who had lived in Mexico City and M adrid had been sitting at his side.

TWO W h a t th e E n g lis h K n e w

1. Peter Martyr, The Decades o f the Newe Worlde or West India (London, 1555), trans. Richard Eden from Pietro Martire d’Anghiera, D e rebus oceanicis et orbe novo decades très (Basel, 1533), 35 verso. Smith’s writings give indication o f his having read widely, but here he is shown reading only those books he explicitly declared he had read. 2. Ibid., 36. 3. Sir Walter Ralegh, The Discoverie o f the Large, Riche and B ewtiful Empyre o f Guiana , ed. Neil Whitehead (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997), 196. 4. Martyr, Decades, 208. O n the sixteenth-century use o f the image o f the naked Indian woman, see the classic article by Rayna Green, “T he Pocahontas Perplex: T he Image o f Indian Women in American Culture,” Massachusetts R eview 16 (1975): 698714. Rebecca Faery treats the theme in depth in Cartographies o f Desire: Captivity, Race, and Sex in the Shaping o f an American Nation (Norman: University o f Oklahoma Press, 1999), esp. 88-91. Concerning the older tradition o f broadside images represent­ ing people from overseas in general as naked, particularly sexual, and often in natural­ ized family units, and the contempt for this tradition on the part o f Richard Eklen and other scholars who deemed themselves serious about colonization, I have been in­ formed by Thomas Hahn, u0 f the N ewe Lander. Text and Image in the First English Book on the New W orld,” Colgate University Humanities Colloquium, April 8,2003.

5. Richard Hakluyt, Principal Navigations, Voyages, Tragiques Ö*Discoveries o f the English Nation , ed. Irwin R. Blacker (New York: Viking, 1965), 39-40. Other captive Indians are mentioned throughout.

Jfotes to pages 2 8 - J 6

185

6. Ibid., 293-94. 7. Hakluyt, “Epistle Dedicatorie,” in first edition of Principal Navigations. 8. John Smith, A Description o f N ew England (London, 1616), in CWÇJS 1:349. 9. For an overview of the recent literature debating China’s reasons for not ex­ ploring in this period, see Gale Stokes, “The Fates of Human Societies: A Review of Recent Macrohistories,”American Historical R eview 106 (2001): 508-25. 10. Francisco Löpez de Gömara, Historia de la conquista de México (Saragossa, 1554); translated by Thomas Nicholson as The Pleasant H istone o f the Conquest o f the West India, now called N ew Spain, atchieved by the worthy prince Hernando Cortes, most delectable to reade (London: Henry Bynneman, 1578). Malinche is introduced as a “true

Interpreter” on pp. 55-56. Juan de Acosta’s Spanish work was likewise translated into English and widely read. That English proponents of colonization knew Malinche to have been crucial is evidenced by the fact that Samuel Purchas included her in the synthetic account he completed in 1612, Purchas H is Pilgrimage (London: William Stansby, 1613), 654. 11. The literature on the Spanish conquests and on the defeat of the Spanish Ar­ mada is vast. Classic works that would make good starting places include Hugh Thomas, Conquest: Montezuma, Cortés, and the Fall o f Old Mexico (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993), John Hemming, The Conquest o f the Incas (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1970), and Geoffrey Parker and Colin Martin, The Spanish Armada (New York: Norton, 1988). 12. The best treatment of the Irish precedent remains Nicholas Canny, “The Ide­ ology of English Colonization: From Ireland to America,” W M Q 30 (1973): 575-98. The most complete study of the era as a whole is David Quinn, England and the D is­ covery o f America, 1481-1620 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974). 13. The best treatment of this topic is Edmund Morgan, American Slavery, Amer­ (New York: Norton, 1975), chap. 1.

ican Freedom: The Ordeal o f Colonial Virginia

14. On the events of 1606, see Philip Barbour, introduction to The Jamestown Voy­ (Cambridge, Eng.: Hakluyt Society, 1969).

ages Under the First Charter, 1606-160Ç

15. Robert Gray, “Episde Dedicatorie,”in A Good Speed to Virginia (London, 1609). 16. Ibid., C3 verso. For a discussion of the ambivalence of the colonizers, see Karen Ordahl Kupperman, Indians and English: Facing O ff in Early America (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2000), 16-18, and especially Andrew Fitzmaurice, H u­ manism and America: A n Intellectual History o f English Colonisation, /500-/625 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003). 17. Ibid., 214. 18. English rhetoric about colonization has been extensively treated by historians and literary critics. Noteworthy books that are particularly relevant include Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom.; Francis Jennings, The Invasion o f America: Indi­ ans, Colonialism, and the Cant o f Conquest (New York: Norton, 1975); and Peter Hulme, “John Smith and Pocahontas,” in Colonial Encounters: Europe and the N ative Caribbean, 1492-rjqrj (London: Methuen, 1986). 19. Sir Thomas More, Utopia, ed. David Harris Sacks (1516; Boston: Bedford Books, 1999), 142.

i8 6

V^otes to pages 37-44

20. George Peckham,ytf True Report o f the Late Discoveries by Sir Humphrey Gilbert (1583), in Envisioning America: English Riansfor the Colonization o f North America, ed. Peter C. Mancall (Boston: Bedford Books, 1995), 64-65. 21. Thomas Harriot, A Briefe and True Report o f the N ew Found L and o f Virginia, in Mancall, Envisioning America, 77. 22. Joyce Chaplin, Subject Matter: Technology; the Body, and Science on the AngloAmerican Frontier, 1300-1676 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001), 36-37. The powder horn is difficult to make out and has often been taken to be a doll in Elizabethan dress. I am grateful to Buck Woodard for pointing out to me that it was almost certainly a horn. 23. King James, “Instructions for Government,” November 20,1606, in Barbour, Jamestown Voyages, 1:43. 24. London Council, “Instructions Given by Way of Advice,” written between November 20 and December 19,1606, in Barbour, Jamestown Voyages, 1:52. 25. Ralph Hamor, A True Discourse o f the Present State ofVirginia (1615; Richmond: Virginia State Library, 1957), 44. De Bry included engravings of ancient Piets with Har­ riot’s Briefe and True Report ; they are reproduced in Mancall, Envisioning America, 103-6. For scholarly discussion of the matter, see Kupperman, Indians and English, 58-59, and Chaplin, Subject Matter, chap. 3, as entrées into an extensive literature. 26. Smith, Description, in CWCJS 1:360. “All the Romanes were not Sdpios; nor all the Geneweses, Columbuses; nor all the Spanyards, Corteses.” Scholars who have noted Smith’s fascination with Cortés include Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom, 77, and John Hart, Representing the N ew World' The English and French Uses o f the Eocample o f Spain (New York: Palgrave, 2001), 214-18. 27. George Percy, “Observations Gathered Out of a Discourse of the Plantation of the Southeme Colonie in Virginia,” in Barbour,Jamestown Voyages, 1:129. 28. Pedro de Zuniga to Philip III, September 22,1607, in Barbour, Jamestown Voy­ ages, 1:115-16. 29. William Strachey, Historie ofT ra vell into Virginia Britania, ed. Louis B. Wright and Virginia Freund (1612; London: Hakluyt Society, 1953), 92. 30. Ibid., 93. For a general discussion of mixed English feelings regarding Spain, see Hart, Representing the N ew World, chap. 5. 31. Strachey, Historie ofTravell, 93-94. Strachey was familiar with the story of Malinche Gömara’s account of the conquest of Mexico, as he elsewhere cited Nicholson’s 1578 translation titled^ Pleasant Historie. He had almost certainly read other Spanish accounts of the conquest as well.

THREE

F irst Contact i. T his “gentleman o f ye colony” was almost certainly Gabriel Archer. Indeed, the “Relation” is generally cited as his. See “A relation o f the Discovery o f our River w rit­ ten and observed by a gentleman o f ye Colony,” in The Jamestown Voyages Under the First Charter, 1606-160% ed. Philip Barbour (Cambridge, Eng.: Hakluyt Society,

1969), 1:80-98.

Quotes to pages 45-48

187

2. Opechankeno was often called Powhatan’s “brother,” but that relationship al­ most certainly existed on a symbolic level. Biologically, they were probably cousins. 3. John Smith, A True Relation o f Such Occurrences and accidents ofnoate as hath hap(London: John Tappe, 1608), in CWCJS 1:45-47. Smith’s account is borne out as much as it can be by the testimony of others who were on a barge that went partway up the river with him and by the fact that the two other men he took with him as he continued on the smaller canoe were indeed killed. I have omitted from the story his assertion that he was surrounded by two hundred warriors, all aiming at him: this is obviously a wild exaggeration, which he included in order to excuse him­ self for having fallen into their custody. The commentary on what he did not know, and on what Opechankeno probably intended to convey, is my own. ned in Virginia

4. Ibid., 1:47. 5. Ibid., 1:49-53. Scholars have found several references to some sort of list or even dictonary prepared byThomas Harriot, but it is no longer extant. Lists ofwords that have been found in works published by Harriot have been collected in A Vocabulary o f Roanoke (Southampton, Pa.: Evolution Publishing, 1999). See Archer, “Relation of the Discovery,” in Barbour,Jamestown Voyages, 1:82,88, for an example of a setder using specific Algonkian words at first contact, and recording his use in a report written in June 1607. 6. Stories of the Spanish finding sacrifice victims being fattened in cages appear, for example, in Francisco Löpez de Gömara, Historia de la conquista de México (Saragossa, 1554), which was translated by Thomas Nicholson in 1578 (see chapter 2, note 10). 7. Smith, True Relation , in CWCJS 1:47. 8. A good biography of Smith is Alden T. Vaughan, American Genesis: Captain (Boston: Litde Brown, 1975). Readers should understand that our information on Smith’s early years comes only from his own later writings, in which he tends to exaggerate. I have culled a bare outline of what I believe can be considered facts, being more conservative than Vaughan in my willingness to believe Smith.

John Smith and the Founding o f Virginia

9. Neither Smith nor anyone else on board knew with certainty who had been named as council members. Instead, Captain Christopher Newport was given a locked box containing the list of names, with instructions to open it only after they had landed at an appropriate site. It was thought best not to divide authority on the voyage over. Still, Smith undoubtedly had an inkling. 10. The most detailed English account of these earliest of interactions is George Percy, “Observations gathered out of a Discourse of the Plantation of the Southerne Colonie in Virginia,”in ^ 2ibo\n yJamestown Voyages, 1:129-46. After the earliest weeks, the most detailed account of relations with the Indians is John Smith’s True Relation , in CWCJS i. Other helpful .accounts are by Gabriel Archer, Francis Magnel, Francis Perkins, and Edward Maria Wingfield, all in HzxbowyJamestown Voyages. The remain­ der of this chapter is built from all these sources, without citation wherever they agree. Whenever I have relied on a specific statement made by only one individual, however, I have noted it. 11. Helen Rountree, Pocahontas's People: The Powhatan Indians o f Virginia Through Four Centuries (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1 9 9 0 ), 30-31.

D^Çotes to pages 48-55

18 8

12. Archaeological excavations at Jamestown have revealed hundreds of shattered projectile points. The English said they “burst” against their armor. See Helen Roun­ tree and E. Randolph Turner III, Before and After Jamestown: Virginia’s Powhatan In ­ dians and Their Predecessors (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2002), 127. 13. The best summary of these events from the indigenous point of view is Philip Barbour, Pocahontas and H er World (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1970), 11-13. 14. Archer, “Relation of the Discovery,” in Barbour,Jamestown Voyages, 1:98. 15. Percy, “Observations,”in Barbour,Jamestown Voyages, 1:143-45. 16. Smith, True Relation , in CWCJS 1:33. 17. Until recendy scholars tended to accept Smith’s version that he and a hunting party had accidentally collided. Undoubtedly that is how it felt to him. But it is im­ possible to believe that the Pamunkey men in their hunting season, noting and ana­ lyzing every movement in the woods, would have been unaware of the travels of a barge full of Englishmen. For the new interpretation, see Helen Rountree, “Pocahon­ tas: The Hostage Who Became Famous,”in Sifters: N ative American Womens Lives, ed. Theda Perdue (New York: Oxford, 2001), 17. 18. All setders who met Powhatan described this type of reception. Smith, True Relation , in CWCJS 1:53. Smith used the word “wenches’*in later accounts; they were “many young women” here. A more accurate phonetic transcription of the Powhatan word for “raccoon” is probably a-reh-han. Certain tribes had a completely different nomenclature. See Frank Siebert, “Resurrecting Virginia Algonquian from the Dead: The Reconstituted and Historical Phonology of Powhatan,” in Studies in Southeastern Indian Languages, ed. James M. Crawford (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1975), 37 1* 19. The story appeared in John Smith, The General Historie o f Virginia, N ew E n ­ gland and the Summer Isles (London: Michael Sparkes, 1624), in CWCJS 2. A few have been so eager to believe some version of the story as to claim that Smith’s 1624 account is likely to have been more, not less, accurate than the 1608 report, in that the colony was by then successfully launched and it was therefore no longer necessary to hide the sufferings of the colonists. Certainly the Virginia Company investors had much to hide in r6o8. The assertion, however, that Smith was thus more honest in 1624 ignores the myriad obvious exaggerations in other parts of the narrative, as well as the fact that to have claimed Pocahontas and her father had taken a shine to him in 1608 would have been helpful to the colonial venture, not detrimental to it. 20. John Smith, The True Travels, Adventures and Observations o f Captain John (London: Thomas Slater, 1630), in CWCJS yi%y. Editor Barbour notes that the word banyo is bath in Turkish, and that there is a description of these baths in Hak­ luyt. Literary critics have made apt analyses of Smith’s texts. An excellent place to be­ gin is Mary C. Fuller, “Mastering Words: The Jamestown Colonists and John Smith," in Voyages in Print: English Travel to America, 1^6—1624 (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­ versity Press, r995). Smith

21. Quoted in Smith, True Travels, in CWCJS 3:145. 22. J. A. Leo Lemay, D id Pocahontas Save Captain John Smith? (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1992). For those who are interested in the nineteenth-century de­ bate, Lemay provides an excellent entrée.

JAÇotes

to pages 5 5 - 6 2

189

23. Rountree, “Pocahontas,” 17-18. For her analysis Rountree draws on narrations of captivity among other Algonkian groups up and down the East Coast over the en­ suing century. For Henry Spelman s description of “their manner o f execution,” see his “Relation o f Virginia,” in Travels and Works o f Captain John Smithy ed. Edward Arber and A. G. Bradley (Edinburgh: John Grant, 1910), cxi. 24. Scholars who have supported this theory include historians Kathleen Brown, in “In Search o f Pocahontas,” in The Human Tradition in Colonial Latin Americay ed. Ian Steele and Nancy Rhoden (W ilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1999); Karen Ordahl Kupperman, in Indians and English: Facing O ff in Early America (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2000); Daniel Richter, in Facing East from Indian Country: A N a tive History o f Early America (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001); as well as anthropologists Frederic Gleach, in Powhatan's World and Colonial Virginia: A Conflict o f Cultures (Lincoln: University o f Nebraska Press, 1997); Margaret Holmes Williamson, in “Pocahontas and Captain John Smith,” History and Anthropology 5 (1992): 365-402. Rountree in her previously cited works acknowledges that such an adoption might have occurred, but she is not absolutely convinced and cer­ tainly does not believe a young girl would have been present at such a ceremony rather than doing evening chores. 25. Smith, True Relation in CWÇJS 1:53-57. In his next book, written when he had had more effective communication with the Indians, Smith claimed Powhatan said that whoever told him there was a great salt sea across the mountains was lying. John Smith et aL, The Proceedings o f the English Colonie in Virginia (London: Joseph Barnes, 1612), in CWCJS 1:236. Rountree has pointed out that the Indians frequently traveled long dis­ tances and were familiar with a wide terrain. They may well have wanted to hide all that they knew from the English, or the English may have failed to understand them. “T he Powhatans and O ther Woodland Indians as Travelers,” in Rountree, Powhatan Foreign Relationsy 1500-1722 (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1993). 26. Smith et al., Proceedings o f the English Coloniet in CWQJS 1:213. 27. Smith, General Historie, in CWCJS 2:151. 28. W illiamson demonstrates that it might have meant “my son” in “Pocahontas and Captain John Smith,” 378. 29. Smith et al., Proceedings o f the English Coloniet in CWCJS 1:248. 30. Alan Gallay makes the apt comparison to the confederacies in the Deep South, which survived longer, in The Indian Slave Trade: The Rise o f the English Empire in the American South, 1670-1717 (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2002). 31. For an assessment o f the importance o f trade goods in this context, see Ste­ phen R. Potter, “Early English Effects on Virginia Algonquian Exchange and Tribute in the Tidewater Potomac,” in Powhatans Mantle: Indians in the Colonial Southeast, ed. Peter H . Wood, Gregory A. Waselkov, and M . Thomas Hartley (Lincoln: University o f Nebraska Press, 1989); and M artin Quitt, “Trade and Acculturation at Jamestown, 1607-1609: T he Limits o f Understanding,” in W M Q 52:2 (1995): 227^-58. T he Chesa­ peake may well have been destroyed before Powhatan met Smith, but probably after the English first appeared. 32. Williamson, “Pocahontas and Captain John Smith,” 369 (quotation). Gleach in Powhatans World makes assumptions like Williamsons. Anthropologists and liter-

19 o

JfÇotes to pages 62-65

ary critics often privilege Native Americans’ cultural framework in assessing their ac­ tions. They do this with the best of intentions, in response to the more traditional “Western” narrative, which often judged indigenous actions in the light of Western assumptions and thus made Indian choices look foolish or naïve. They have, however, often taken this view to an extreme, impliddy (and occasionally even explicitly) deny­ ing Indians the ability to change their worldviews and their methods when faced with entirely new conditions. A famous example in another arena has been scholars’ insis­ tence until recendy that Moctezuma, the astute and successful twenty-year emperor of the Aztecs, assumed that Hernando Cortés was a god when his priests told him so and proceeded to make political and military decisions based on this conviction. Histori­ ans have now taken that notion apart. See Camilla Townsend, “Burying the White Gods: New Perspectives on the Conquest of Mexico,”American Historical R eview 108 (2003): 659-87. Powhatan was undoubtedly influenced by his religion and his priests, but probably no more so than were the English. 33. To determine what Algonltian Indians really wanted to buy, historians consult merchants’ records. For a list of the best-selling goods, see Richter, Facing E ast from Indian Country , 43. On Spelman’s statement that since the arrival of the English the people wanted to do their farming with iron tools, see his “Relation of Virginia,” in Arber and Bradley, Travels and Works, cxi. 34. Smith, General Historie, in CWCJS 2:106, and Proceedings o f the English Colonie in CWCJS 1:213, 232. For comments on earlier English fantasies in this regard, see W illiam Hamlin, “Imagined Apotheoses: Drake, Harriot, and Ralegh in the Am eri­ cas,” in Journal ofthe History o f Ideas (1996): 405-28.

35. Smith, General Historie , in CWCJS 2:149. The Indians’ attitude toward Euro­ pean writing is debatable. Scholars have not reached consensus, and some would ar­ gue that it was indeed mystifying to the Indians. 36. For a transcription and rough translation o f one mocking song about the E n ­ glish, see W illiam Strachey, The Historic o f Travell into Virginia Britania , ed. Louis B. W right and Virginia Freund (1612; London: Hakluyt Society, 1953), 85-86. A n inter­ esting article on Algonkians’ condescending attitudes toward the French is Cornelius Jaenen, “Amerindian Views o f French Culture in the Seventeenth Century,” in Am er­ ican Encounters: Natives and Newcomers from European Contact to Indian Removal\ 1500-1850, ed. Peter C. Mancall and James H . M errell (New York: Routledge, 2000).

37. Thomas Harriot, A Briefe and True Report o f the N ew Found L and o f Virginia, in Envisioning America: English Plans fo r the Colonization o f North America, ed. Peter C. Mancall (Boston: Bedford Books, 1995), 79. 38. Pepiscuminah, werowance of the Quioccohannock, cited in Strachey, Historie 101. It should be noted that Kupperman in Indians and English discusses another possibility at some length—namely, that the Algonkians believed the new­ comers were their own ancestors, returned from the dead, strengthened by their expe­ riences in the other world. But I have found no evidence for this theory among the Powhatan specifically. o f Travell,

39. Joyce Chaplin writes incisively: “Indian interpretations of nature and responses to colonization were innovative, profound, witty and ironic.” See her Subject M atter: Technology, the Body, and Science on the Anglo-American Frontier, 1500-1676 (Cam­ bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001), 34. For the religious views of Poca­ hontas’s brother-in-law, see Samuel Purchas, Purchas, H is Pilgrimage, 3rd ed. (London:

N otes to pages 65-73

191

William Stansby, 1617), 954"55- Pepiscuminah, cited in note 38 above, who said he thought the Christian gods were stronger, also absolutely refused to convert. FOUR

Jam estown

1. John Smith, A True Relation o f Such Occurrences and accidents o f noate as hath (London: John Tappe, 1608), in CWCJS 1:63.

hapnedin Virginia

2. Ibid., 1:65. 3. Ibid., 1:79. On Namontack being presented in England as a son of Powhatan, see Pedro de Zuniga to His Majesty the King of Spain, June 2 6 , 1 6 0 8 , in The Jamestown Voyages under the First Charter, 1606-1609, e